No Response received to emailed letter sent 23/12/2015 or...

No Response received to emailed letter sent 23/12/2015 or additional questions asked,
1) Could you also inform me as to what was the average mill feed grade for November. 2) Could you clarify if the hourly mill feed sample taken is automated or done manually.
I waited 15 day's until 07/01/16- with no response & therefore resent below letter to BOD & Brett Lambert.

To Brett Lambert-CEO ABM Resources;
Hi Brett; I hope the review of this letter by Directors & Management prompts logical realistic discussion & results in decisions being made that will begin to restore investor confidence & share price value to all concerned in 2016.
I hope to hear from you in the near future-within two weeks.
Regards; salt
Cc Dr Mike Etheridge- PhD, FTSE, FAIG, FAICD
Ms Jutta Zimmermann :  GM-CORPORATE / CFO / Company sec/ -Dip AQF, Dip IT, GradDipACG, AGIA
Mr Andrew Ferguson- BSc.
Dr Helen Garnett- BSc (Hons), PhD, FTSE, FAICD.
Mr Richard Procter- BSc (Eng), MIMMM, CEng, MBA.   

Please find attached: Letter from myself, COPIES OF YOUR REPORTS TO THE ASX : 21ST September, 21st October, 20th November, 24th December 2015 To all ABM Resources Directors & management,
ASX release 20 November old pirate operational overview  ABM Resources NL (“ABM” or “the Company”) has undertaken a thorough review of operational performance at the Old Pirate Gold Mine, primarily focusing on the discrepancy being experienced between mine estimated head grade and mill reconciled grade (the mine call factor), which was reported on in the last Quarterly Report of 19 October 2015.  
It was announced then that mill reconciliation only accounted for approximately 70 percent of, mine estimated gold production up to that time, this trend is continuing.
Gold lock-up in the processing plant, in particular the ball mill, was earlier proposed as a significant contributing factor.
In an effort to assess the level of gold lock-up in the mill, a section of the mill lining was removed to recover material lodged behind.
Although analysis of this material is incomplete, preliminary estimates indicate that several hundred ounces of gold are potentially lodged behind the mill liners.
However, this quantity of gold only represents less than 10 percent of the apparent shortfall between the mine and the mill Other sections of the plant have been closely examined, but only relatively small amounts of trapped gold have been identified and recovered.
At the same time, an independent review of overall plant security has also been conducted, which did not identify any weaknesses in the company’s security management and systems.
The secondary crusher has now been returned to service and the treatment of accumulated higher,  grade material has seen the average mill feed grade for November to date, based on provisional,  estimates, exceed the grade achieved in all prior months since operations commenced.


07/01/16
I wish to talk a bit more about this subject.  
Firstly I understand the focus to increase revenue as mine closure is now imminent unless there is a substantial increase in the au gold price, dilution is further controlled through improved extraction method, or more importantly the 30-40% of unaccounted for  gold, being the differential between the average unreconciled mill feed grams per tonne & the actual gold recovered through gold pour is resolved?   
   The reality being the differential between mine estimated grade and mill reconciled grade is a completely separate issue regarding to the ongoing concerns of dilution of g p/t during the extraction of mineralised ore, as mill feed assayed samples are down steam from mining & extraction of mineralised ore.
Given the mill feed sample is taken every hour & 12 samples are batched together & fire assayed,
Per 12 hr shift, x 2 shifts in a 24hr period = 24 samples per 24 hr period.
The Coyote Gold Processing plant is operating on a two weeks on- one week off basis, therefore running approx.- 21day's per month x 24 samples per 24hr period, resulting in 504 individual samples being taken per month-thus equating to 42 batched- 12 hr shift- fire assayed sample results per month, would represent a very good average mill feed grams per tonne per month of contained gold-thus giving a very good indication of pending gold recovery through the actual gold pour.

The average mill feed grams p/ t - conveyor sampled every hour, own lab on site fire assayed result is an important number, especially given that only 10 days before the end of November the new CEO, MR Brett Lambert obviously thought it was an important enough indication of pending recovered gold out-put to ensure he mention it to investors.
Quote; the treatment of accumulated higher grade material has seen the average mill feed grade for November to date, based on provisional estimates exceed the grade achieved in all prior months since operations commenced.
Were the average unreconciled November mill feed fire assayed sample results higher than the previously reported 10.8g p/t as the CEO-Brett Lambert stated in ASX release 20th November?    
Many loyal share holders (myself included) had resisted selling ABU earlier because we believed, what was reported to market in previous ASX releases- regarding average mill feed unreconciled gold grade grams per tonne.
When the production report was released for the month of November the average, the unreconciled mill feed was not included ?    Were these very important results emitted from Novembers production report because the treatment of accumulated higher grade material had seen the average mill feed grade for November to date exceed the grade achieved in all prior months since operations commenced as per, Brett Lambert’s observation & statement he made only 10 days before the end of November.
If these results were as high as our CEO implied (only 10 days before the end of November) then it’s likely had they been included in Novembers production results they would have further left us as investors baffled & asking difficult to answer questions, is it therefore likely why they were not included in the reported November production update or was it a coincidental oversight?
This issue has been continual it has put at risk the whole operation resulting in the lack of confidence by loyal investors-the market, WHOM FEEL DECEIVED, & as a resulting effect caused the share price to plunge to ridiculously low levels, whereby ABU is now extremely vulnerable to a low takeover offer, & the reputation of ABU's directors has all but been destroyed.
07/01/16
I would like to communicate some thoughts regarding this issue.
1) Clarified that ABU samples from mill feed conveyor every hour & batches the relevant- 12 hr shift (12 samples), sending them to its own onsite Lab & completes evaluation of mill feed average grade through fire assay of batched samples, this fire assay procedure is known to be an extremely accurate method of evaluation, its been established through having being reported to market already that the sampling procedures & the fire assay procedure & techniques are correct as they have been scrutinized & evaluated through being independently verified as being correct in method & resulting outcome.
2) Reported tonnage throughput commencement of commissioning through to the end of September quarter is 39,000t, the reported average mill feed being 10.9g p/t vs the average reported 7.6g p/t recovered gold through gold pour results in a reported 30% of unaccounted for gold at the differential of 3.3g p/t x 39,000t =128,000grams= 4,138 oz of gold at $1,525au per oz  equates to $6,310,000au, in unaccounted for gold or revenue, as gold can’t evaporate either the reported mill feed fire assayed results are wrong or its been misappropriated, have these very important for evaluation & indication of pending gold pour- grams p/t output, average mill feed grams p/ t- conveyor sampled every hour own lab on site fire assayed results been correct ?
For the results to have been doctored up is inexcusable & likely unrealistic given the long period of time, the number of samples & the people involved from laboratory through to management, further processes have been reported as having been independently verified as being correct including total gold recovery achieving 99%, this correlates almost exactly with what Tanami recovery was when they were processing gold through the coyote gold processing facility reported as being 98.5%.
None the less, “this is a massive issue”, Average mill feed reported as entering the coyote gold processing facility through 12 hourly batch sampled & fire assayed results gives investors & management a very good indication of the pending gold pour & we as investors have believed what has been reported in ASX releases to be factual & therefore have & should be able to base our investment decisions on this perceived to be factual content, as if information has not been correct then investors have been mislead by what has been contained in ASX market releases, & therefore ABU would likely be in breach of market integrity rules -MRI's.
3) Recently advised 21st Dec in November production results recovered gold was 6.8g p/t vs unstated average mill feed g p/t, although Brett Lambert informed the market on the 20th November that the treatment of accumulated higher, grade material has seen the average mill feed grade for November to date, based on provisional estimates, exceed the grade achieved in all prior months since operations commenced., further as it was stated that up until the 20th Nov that coyote had the highest g p/t gold mill feed so far, as the mill feed sampled results referred to by Brett Lambert had to have been in excess of the previous 10.9 g p/t,-so for the purpose of this conversation i will, make some assumptions & it matters not if they are exactly right, so let’s presume head grade-average mill feed stated as being above 10.9 g p/t increased to 11.5 g p/t & as actual recovery through gold pour was 6.8g p/t, the differential has expanded & would be now be some 40% differential between sampled mill feed g p/t & recovered gold, or more importantly 40% of gold unaccounted for - this missing revenue that would undoubtedly if accounted for, mean that the whole old pirate mining operation would profitable & therefore should continue.
  07/01/16
4) The largest security risk is only running this operation on a two weeks on one week off basis, unfortunately this scenario is the most likely one, given all other possibilities have been eliminated,
Our CEO- Brett Lambert thought this issue important enough to conduct an independent review of overall plant   security stating Quote; the issue still remains this trend is continuing.
Further Brett Lamberts comment 24/12/15- Quote; The provisional mill feed grade, based on hourly sampling of the mill feed conveyor, exceeded reconciled mill head grade, leading to expectations of higher gold production than was achieved.
Therefore the average now reconciled mill feed average sampled results that Brett Lambert had stated 20^thNovember, quote; based on provisional estimates exceed the grade achieved in all prior months since operations commenced.
Exceeded by 30- 40% actual recovered- poured gold Considerations: Regardless if gravity traps (dry or wet side of processing circuit) or coarse gold containment areas above, around or inside of gold room are being compromised (during the week off) while coyote operations are shut down, these areas would be virtually impossible to access while plant is operational, in addition you will have far more security with numerous operational personal, & eyes about.
Are there many operators or shift bosses from Tanami day's that may have prior very detailed knowledge of the coyote gold processing plants idiosyncrasies -RE gravity traps etc.?
Is it the same personnel that are left on site routinely during the operational shut down week off? If so?- “That’s just plain stupid”.  
Don’t presume because ABU is operating in an isolated area that gold would be hard to get off site, it could be being stashed almost anywhere & with a hand held GPS marked for retrieval later or be leaving site on one of the many freight trucks etc.
Please consider the reality that as all other plausible explanations for the discrepancy have been evaluated & therefore excluded that as the issue is still evident; Quote in the words of Brett Lambert- the issue still remains & this trend is continuing, then 24hrs per day, 7 days a week continuous coyote gold processing plant operation should be the next step in the elimination process.
There is literally many millions of dollars in gold unaccounted for, being the differential between actual recovered-poured gold & the mill feed fire assayed average feed samples, if this 30-40% of gold were to be inclusive in the cash flow, ABU old pirate operations would not just be financially viable but very profitable.
Therefore as ABU has informed the market its considering moving to 24hr per day operations, please do so ASAP so a close evaluation/comparison can be made between mill feed v/s recovered gold, if they begin to move closer to each other within normal operational variance, it would strongly indicate what the likely issue has been all this time & further investigations could be made & deterrents like permanent video security could be set up on site.
07/01/16
You owe it to share holders & your own integrity to implement 24hr p/d- 7day's per week permanent Coyote gold recovery operations as early as possible, ensuring results can be evaluated before final decisions on ABU's future are determined from results.  
I would appreciate answers to the following questions
1) What was the average unreconciled mill feed conveyor fire assayed results for November?
2) You have informed the market that the coyote gold processing plant is likely to revert to 24hr, 7 days per week operations taking into account the above mentioned, what is the timing for its implementation?
3) At the ABM Resources AGM; I personally asked Mr Mike Etheridge to explain the differential reported as being a 30% variance between recovered –(poured gold) & the average mill feed fire assayed g p/t reported to market, he declined to comment & no satisfactory explanation has been forth coming,
"I am & so are many investors still waiting for clarification" ?
4) Its extremely confounding that right up until the 20^th November 2015, ABU is again reporting & therefore informing investors ensuring they are aware that the average mill feed conveyor assayed sample results are fantastic, given they are the highest ever put through the coyote gold processing plant?
"Again you are asked to explain this ongoing variance"?
5) It’s not that complicated either the average mill feed coyote gold processing plant assayed every hour, batched 12 hourly & fire assayed in ABM resources own on site laboratory results have been doctored all this time- in order to mislead investors, which seems ludicrous to contemplate given the time frame of sampling the number of samples taken & the number of people whom would be aware, or the gold is being stolen.
"What exactly are directors doing about this very serious known ongoing problem" ?
In Brett Lambert’s own recent words the issue still remains & this trend is continuing!!
6) Rather than face this issue its seems awfully convenient to shut down old pirate operations & focus on buccaneer as ABU’s future, thus smoke screening out the real issues that have not been given any explanation other than to report to market that the current phase of mining at Old Pirate has not achieved targeted financial performance due to the Quote: discrepancy between the estimated mining inventory and mill reconciled production-reported 24^th December-merry xmas ?
Don’t you mean the discrepancy between poured-reconciled gold & average mill feed g p/t?
(30-40%- missing & unaccounted for gold).

As for inventory you have informed the market that Western Limb is some 300mts in length & reported in the reconciliation summary 31st October 2015; that Western Limb has been achieving a mill reconciled recovery grade of 10.7g p/t.
The Old Glory deposit discovery being north of Golden Hind & south of Old Pirate deposits is very conveniently located at current operations & drill intercepts returned 6mts averaging 37g p/t & at only 12mts depth, there would seem to be plenty of inventory if ABU was to increase numerous access points into western limb, open up the old glory deposit & commence 24hr 7 day per week operations.


  07/01/16
Further its extremely likely that the conflict in Syria, tensions between Saudi Arabia, Israel & Iran not forgetting Russia & the west will deteriorate & be long lasting, pushing up the Price of gold, it is apparent that the US economy is not as strong as it has been portrayed –(in order maintain market sentiment) & will likely see the USD slide further, pushing the US POG higher, additionally china contracting will very likely see the AUD slide & the AU POG being the beneficiary, the reserve bank of Australia could also reduce interest rates- (thus putting additional downward pressure on the AUD & resulting in AU POG moving upwards) in order to help maintain real-estate values & increase exporter returns resulting in higher Iron ore, Gas & Coal royalties to the commonwealth, any & all of the above will result in the AU POG rising & increasing the viability of ABU operations & profitability if/when its coyote gold processing facility reverts to 24hr-7day’s per week operations.

I do hope the new CEO & THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS understand there will be investigative accountability if this issue is not given the priority it should have long ago received.

Further I am hopeful some realistic sense of RETROSPECTIVE responsibility will prevail & be applied to the future direction decided upon for ABM Resources- its investors whom you as DIRECTORS should apply the utmost priority to when decisions are contemplated regarding ABU’s future.
It would seem from a logical prospective that Coyote gold processing operations should revert to 24hr-7day operations ASAP while the gold price is monitored as geopolitical events unravel.
In the best interests of all concerned .
I would expect to receive a reply within two weeks; I hope you will not underestimate my resolve in the pursuit of the above mentioned.
Regards: salt
p.s. Noted: I have not yet received a reply from previous emails sent 23/12/2015 to Mr Etheridge nor Mr Lambert this latest correspondence should override the previous sent via email.
All above in my opinion only, investors should do there own research & draw there own conclusions!
gltah-salt